home

Part of Being an American

In America today, people often take the government and the security and liberty it provides for granted, such as the right to voice one’s opinion without fear of repercussions, or the FDA that generally keeps food safe. People also sometimes focus on only one of those ideas, which can be just as harmful as taking all of them for granted. In //1984// by George Orwell, Winston and Julia challenge the government, called Big Brother. The Big Brother government is oppressive…so oppressive that the citizens are constantly being watched through telescreens, and their liberties are almost nonexistent. Winston decides he wants to change that. Yet, his plans are foiled when the government catches him and tortures him in order to make him conform to their ways. In Cory Doctorow’s //Little Brother//, Marcus is a teenager in San Francisco when a terrorist group bombs the Bay Bridge. He is taken in by the Department of Homeland Security, and much like Winston in //1984//, is tortured in order for the government to obtain what they think is essential information in catching the bombers. After he is set free, he uses the Xnet to gather large groups of people who have the same interest as him…to take down the DHS. Many people believe that liberty and security can coincide, but sometimes it is hard to find that line that connects them. In these books, that idea was discussed. This in turn brought up the ideas that Americans expect a balance between liberty and safety, the extent to which the government will ensure that balance is unknown, and there are multiple ways the government and citizens can achieve that balance.

Think of America with its priorities out of order. No longer are security and liberties the main concern. Rather, being a world power and building up the economy is at the top of the list. Now what does it mean to be an American?

Safety and liberty coinciding sometimes seems impossible in today’s society. What with [|airport security checks] that have some people worrying about their rights and controversy surrounding the [|safety of mosques] being built on Ground Zero, a lot of times it is one way or another. But it is not supposed to be that way, and it never has been. In the Declaration of Independence, it is stated that, “….all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” ("Declaration"). In another sentence, it is quoted, “…it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying it’s foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness” ("Declaration"). Both of these quotes exemplify safety and liberty overlapping. These two qualities have been coinciding since the beginning of America. They are part of being an American, both separately and together. Americans should not have to give up either in order to gain the other but they still do. In //1984//, the citizens do not get either liberty nor security. “WAR IS PEACE/FREEDOM IS SLAVERY/IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” (Orwell 4), is the slogan of Big Brother. Oceania, the country where Winston lives, is not America by any means. None of the citizens of Oceania have any rights. They do what Big Brother says, and live in constant fear of the Thought Police. Obviously, then, they also have no feeling of safety, nor actual safety. Oceania and the Big Brother government are the exact opposite of America and its government. To read //1984// and compare it to America makes the readers realize that liberty and safety is what makes America the country it is. Not only are those things American citizens take for granted, they are also a huge part of what it means to be an American. In //Little Brother//, the main character, Marcus, knows that part of being an American is obtaining both safety and liberty, although sometimes it’s hard to get both. After he is captured by the Department of Homeland Security and sat down with Carrie Johnstone, otherwise known as Severe Haircut Lady, he demands an attorney. “’ I would like to contact an attorney,’ I said. ‘I would like to know what I’ve been charged with. I would like to see some form of identification from both of you…I’ve got the right to my privacy’” (Doctorow 49). To this, Severe Haircut Lady responds, “‘You’re under the mistaken impression that you’ve been picked up by the police for a crime. You need to get past that. You are being detained as a potential enemy combatant by the government of the United States’” (Doctorow 49). Marcus realizes that he is in trouble with the Department of Homeland Security, which is part of the government. He asks for an attorney because he knows that they can help protect his right to privacy as an American citizen. Yet, by this time, he also realizes that the Department of Homeland Security is not doing the interrogations the way they should have. They are not allowing the prisoners to go to the bathroom or talk to anyone, and they have been shackled up for quite some time. He must have realized that he was in potential danger in the situation. Even if he knew that they would not actually hurt him, his feeling of safety was impaired, and for that reason he probably requested an attorney. He realizes that as an American citizen, he can request an attorney to protect both his liberty and safety, even if he is being detained as a suspect. The right to liberties and safety should not be conditional based on the situation, or the state a country is in, yet sometimes that is how it works. That should always be part of being an American. For example, American’s rights should not be taken away in a time of war, nor their safety. One such instance was the Japanese American relocation camps during WWII. The United States was taking away the rights of their Japanese American citizens, but they also thought they were protecting the safety of all the other American citizens. After 9/11, Muslims were being brought in by the U.S. government for questioning about the World Trade Center, when in reality they were being stripped of their liberties while the government thought they were protecting everybody else. Safety and liberty are qualities of life that sometimes are hard to see coming together in today’s society. In //Little Brother// and //1984//, both were brought up but in different situations. Both Winston and Marcus were giving up their rights for a sense of safety. Marcus wanted to go home, and Winston just wanted his society to change. But no person, American or not, should have to [|give up their rights for a sense of security], or vice versa.

The government seems to have stopped taking the citizen's suggestions to heart. New laws have stopped being passed through Congress, and the society is slowly trickling to a stop. How much farther will the government go to preserve the citizen’s liberties and safety?

The government often times does not seem as motivated as the people to help liberties and safety concur in the society. The government seems as if they have no emotions: they worry about safety and liberties, yet they don't put any emotion in them. They base their decisions off what they see fit for the entire society, not always what is best for the individuals in the society. That brings up the problem of how far the government, whether American or foreign, will go to protect the civilian's liberties and keep them safe. The [|Japanese American internment camps] during WWII were also a perfect example of the problem of the American government protecting both. "At the time, Executive Order 9066 was justified as 'military necessity' to protect against domestic espionage and sabotage. However, it was later documented that 'our government had in its possession proof that not one Japanese American, citizen or not, had engaged in espionage, not one had committed any act of sabotage'" (Ina). The word 'protect' jumps out when reading this quote from the article "Children of the Camps" because protection goes hand in hand with safety. President Roosevelt, along with many Americans and government workers, believed that imprisoning the Japanese Americans residing in the U.S. would help protect the rest of the American population from espionage or sabotage by the Japanese Americans. Yet, they found a way around the Bill of Rights when they imprisoned these innocent people. Executive Order 9066 was the order President Roosevelt issued. The American government was protecting most people's safety, but at the same time, violating some people's rights. In this case, it is easy to see the problem. When is it right to protect a population while at the same time violating a document that has been in place for hundreds of years? That question coincides with another question: how far should the government have gone to protect everybody as well as preserve everyone's rights? It seemed to many in this case that it was obvious: protect the larger majority of Americans who worried about the Japanese Americans contacting Japan. Yet to others, it was worth giving up their possible safety in order for the Japanese Americans not to be imprisoned. It was a fine line between those two during this time, and although President Reagan issued a formal apology to the Japanese American people in 1998, it is still hard to decide whether the American government did the right thing in that situation. In //1984//, it is easy to tell the government does not do the right thing. The Thought Police are very unlike the police in today's society. When the Thought Police find someone who has committed a crime, the punishments are severe. "In the vast majority of cases there was no trial, no report of the arrest. People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: //vaporized// was usually the word" (Orwell 19). The Thought Police, like America's police force, had a job that was to catch people in the society who were committing crimes, but unlike America's police, the Thought Police were not people citizens could go to if they had trouble. They would deny them of the few liberties they had. In the Big Brother society, the only person citizens had to look up to was a corrupt government, yet many of them did look up to Big Brother because they knew no other way, even if the police force took away their liberties rather than restoring them. In today's society, one would hope that citizens could look up to their police force and government because they are the ones who restore liberty and protect society. What would happen if in today's society, the citizens pushed for even more liberty and protection coinciding? Americans generally do not have this problem. There are definitely cases that have had much controversy because some feel the government did not adequately deal with the situation, but there has never been such a huge case that the citizens have pushed for reform to an extent. It would be interesting to see what would happen and how far the government would go to protect liberties and safety. For example, in //1984//'s society, the citizens would have a reason to push the government to step up the way they handle the coinciding of liberty and protection. But America has been, in what some people think, sufficiently supplied with these. What would happen if the citizens pushed for more? How far would the government take the demands and how would they handle it? That is something most people don't know. However, in //Little Brother//, that demand is made, but the government does not handle it the way Marcus wants them to. He wants protection from the terrorists that bombed the Bay Bridge, but he also does not want to be stripped of his liberties. Since //Little Brother// is much easier to relate to than //1984//, while reading, the reader almost gets a taste of what would happen in America if that demand was made in present day. "'The security,' he said, looking around his little shop with its tubs of dried beans and seeds, its shelves of Turkish groceries. 'The government. They monitor it all now, it was in the papers. PATRIOT Act II, the Congress passed it yesterday. Now they can monitor every time you use your card. I say no. I say my shop will not help them spy on my customers'" (Doctorow 90). This is the store keeper at the Turkish store speaking to Marcus about the PATRIOT Act II that has been passed. In America, there was a [|PATRIOT Act I] that basically allows, in times of war, for officials to circumvent the normal Constitutional rights and laws if they suspect someone of terrorism. In some ways, America has already seen a glimpse of PATRIOT Act II in PATRIOT Act I. In //Little Brother,// the store keeper is upset because he says that he will not help the government spy on people in his shop. The government probably thinks that by passing this act, they can help keep the majority of the population (not including potential terrorists, who are the ones they are searching for) safe by preventing terrorism before it happens. Yet, they are also taking away the rights of, in this instance, the people who buy products from that store. The store keeper is responding by saying no. He says that he will not help take away the rights of his customers. He is an example of what might happen if the government only heightened one of either liberty or safety. The government decided that safety, in this case, was probably more important than protecting the citizens’ rights. What would happen if, in America, that really happened? How would the people react? //Little Brother// just helps set up the situation. It asks the question of how far the government would go. The government seems to have control on many an aspect of America, but they also do not know everything. The Japanese-American internment camps were living proof. Americans do not know exactly how far they will go to ensure the citizen's safety and liberties. //1984// proved that if the government did nothing, the society would totally collapse, and //Little Brother// gave the readers an accurate description of what could happen if they did. Overall, it is a matter of opinion on how far the government will go to preserve liberty and safety.

The citizens start to wonder what they can do to prevent the situation from getting even more out of hand, and what the government can do, as well. By now, the society is close to ruins…there is so much they need protection from, yet the government isn’t giving them any. What comes next?

Many times in life, it is easier to point out the flaws in something than give a suggestion as to how to fix it. In the case of liberty versus safety, it is the same way. The government often is criticized for not suggesting different solutions for various conflicts that have to do with safety or liberty. Sometimes, though, it is not only the government that can help protect both liberties and safety. Sometimes it is the citizens that can, and should, help find solutions as well. One such example is the Westboro Baptist Church. The Westboro Baptist Church is known for picketing soldiers' funerals and condemning homosexuality. The group has the right to picket peacefully and have their opinions, yet many disagree with them. They use harsh words and their signs are often offensive to many. One such sign is a sign that says "Thank God for Dead Soldiers". The Westboro Baptist Church group is headed by Fred Phelps. The Phelps family often files lawsuits against communities that try to prevent them from picketing, and they win almost all of them. "When they win, they often receive tens of thousands of dollars in court fees. And their winning streak is likely to continue, now that the Supreme Court has decided that Westboro's right to free speech trumps the rights of families to bury their loved ones undisturbed" (Hagerty). The Phelps are allowed to continue to picket soldiers' funerals. However, there is a group that decided they did not want that happening--the Patriot Guard Riders. The Patriot Guard Riders' mission is to protect fallen soldiers' families from the Westboro Baptist Church and other non-wanted picketers. They got their start in 2005 when a group from Kansas contacted the Riders to counter Westboro Baptist Church's planned protest at a soldier's funeral. The government and Supreme Court has already ruled that what Westboro is doing is Constitutional, despite the fact that the soldier's family has a right to peacefully bury their family member. The Riders protect the family's sense of safety, rather than their actual safety. Many would not feel safe if they were bombarded by protesters they do not know, especially after someone's death. If more citizens worked like the Riders did, insuring other families' security while not interfering with the protesters' rights, the world might be able to achieve the equality of liberty and safety to a higher degree. Without the government stepping in, sometimes it is easier to maintain those rights. In this situation especially, it has turned from something that could have become a huge problem, into something that people are still upset over, but can now be somewhat nullified, as can other situations if citizens act in the same manner. If citizens have the courage to step in a situation they do not think is right, America may be able to have less conflicts that attract the attention of the government, which in turn can preserve the involved peoples’ rights and safety. However, in //1984//, the government was always present, and they controlled every aspect of everything. "'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past'" (Orwell 35). In this book, the Party controls everything. They control, like the quote suggests, the past, present, and future. To maintain equality between liberty and safety in America, America's government and citizens need to realize that fact. Rather than the Party controlling all times, though, the citizens and government have the past, present, and future in their hands; their actions affect everything. When the government passes a law, they need to think about how it affects the future. What if that law impedes on the country's ability to protect itself in the future? What if an amendment to the Constitution totally demerits the meaning of the rest of the peoples’ rights? Citizens need to realize that what they do writes history. History is what happens to the world and a lot of times history repeats itself. Their actions might affect the protection the country has against terrorists, or the rights they are entitled to. Another thing Americans need to be aware of is rewriting the past. For example, if school aged kids are not taught everything about 9/11, that might affect the way they could handle another situation similar to that, and the way they protect themselves. Also, if the past is rewritten, that could affect Americans' understanding of why the events occurred, such as how the security was breached and the motive for doing so. If American liberties are taken away in the past, the people in the present and future need to realize why, so they can prevent them from being taken away again. In //Little Brother//, though, that was not the issue. The problem was that no one, not even the government, knew about the Department of Homeland Security and how they were torturing people. At one point, Marcus says, "The headline was set in the biggest type I'd seen since 9/11: INSIDE GITMO-BY-THE-BAY. Beneath it, in slightly smaller type: 'How the DHS has kept our children and friends in [|secret prisons] on our doorstep'" (Doctorow 114). Throughout this entire book, only the Department of Homeland Security, the prisoners who had been set free and a few other select people knew about the DHS's operations. In most cases, secret governmental operations like that could be avoided if the government and citizens would be aware. Sometimes it is hard to realize that things are happening around the world, especially when the directors of the operation are trying to keep it concealed. Yet, in other cases, all it takes is a look around to see the problem. Many people were killed in the bombing of Bay Bridge in //Little Brother//. Others were presumed to be dead, but were instead being held captive by the DHS. If those people's relatives and friends had been more aware of their disappearance and investigated a little bit harder, they might have realized the truth. In the real world, it is important to be constantly aware of the surroundings and events happening in the world, no matter age or position. Anyone can change the way society operates, and everything, even if it does not seem like it, can affect the liberties Americans possess, or the security they get as well. Awareness is key in maintaining equality between liberty and security. So is the citizens and government intervening when necessary, and not intervening when it is right as well, in order to maintain the liberties and protection Americans already have. Understanding that every action affects how the future plays out, and even the past, is also a way to insure that equality.

America is becoming a dystopian society. No one ever thought it would get to that point, yet maybe citizens would have realized this was the path America was going down if they had been more aware. What is there left to do? That is the question every government worker and citizen is asking themselves.

//1984// and //Little Brother// discussed how safety and liberty being presented simultaneously are what Americans expect, how far the government will go to ensure and protect both safety and liberty, and the means of attaining that equality. Being an American includes having both security and liberties, no matter the time or situation, although some would disagree and say that Americans do not have enough of either. Most people do not know how far the government will go to equally protect safety and liberty; there are many questions to be asked about that exact topic. It seems as though the government is sometimes not the one needed to step in; sometimes it is the civilians that need to step up and help preserve those qualities of life, as well as realize every action has a consequence and to always stay aware. One way to go about making sure that both liberty and safety are still in place hundreds of years from now is to be constantly aware. 'Being aware' is a broad generalization. It includes everything, from realizing that actions can determine the amount of safety and liberty that is offered, to knowing when to let the government handle it, to being mindful of the world's events even if they do not currently seem relevant. If no one is aware in the world, its problems will never be solved. No one wants his or her society to be corrupt and dystopian…then why let it get to that point in the first place? There are ways to prevent that and at the same time preserve liberty and safety. When citizens are willing to give up liberty for safety or safety for liberty, what does that say about the society around them? Because it seems as though the government should be able to constantly be changing and flexing so that Americans never have to give up what they were promised in the beginning—safety and liberty.

Works Cited "Airport Security Will Implement New Body Scanners." //Jewish Singles Travel, Jewish Singles Cruises//. Amazing Journeys, 25 Aug. 2010. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. .

"Declaration of Independence." //National Archives and Records Administration//. National Archives. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. .

Doctorow, Cory. //Little Brother//. New York: Tom Doherty Associates, 2008. Print.

"Dorothea Lange Photographs Japanese-American Internment Camps." //The Beachside Resident//. The Beachside Resident. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Glor, Jeff. "Proposed Mosque Near Ground Zero Stokes Debate." //Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News//. Columbia Broadcasting System, 3 Aug. 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012..

Hagerty, Barbara B. "A Peek Inside The Westboro Baptist Church : NPR." //NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR//. National Public Radio, 2 Mar. 2011. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. .

Ina, Satsuki. "Children of the Camps." //PBS: Public Broadcasting Service//. The Children of the Camps Project, 1999. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. .

Mitchell, Matthew. "Harry Reid and the Chamber of Secrets." //Articles, Headlines, and Conservative Commentary - That's Right//. 14 Oct. 2009. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Orwell, George. //1984//. Orlando: Signet Classic, 1950. Print.

Potter, Will. "What Was It Again the Terrorists Hate?" //Green Is The New Red//. 19 Apr. 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

"The Day the Earth Stood Still 1951 Unlimited Power - Klaatu Speech 40- Vxyx2z." //YouTube//. YouTube, 11 June 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. .

"War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity." //Christus Rex//. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Works Referenced

Doctorow, Cory. //Little Brother//. New York: Tom Doherty Associates, 2008. Print.

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. "USA Patriot Act." //Welcome To FinCEN.gov//. United States Department of the Treasury. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Hagerty, Barbara B. "A Peek Inside The Westboro Baptist Church : NPR." //NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR//. National Public Radio, 2 Mar. 2011. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. .

Ina, Satsuki. "Children of the Camps." //PBS: Public Broadcasting Service//. The Children of the Camps Project, 1999. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. .

"Japanese-American Internment." //Digital History//. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Miller, Toni-Ann. "Patriot Guard Riders Shield Families from Protesters at Military Funerals." //West Palm Beach News//. The Palm Beach Post, 1 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

"More Religious Persecution In Iran." //News | English//. Voices of America, 18 Aug. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. .

Orwell, George. //1984//. Orlando: Signet Classic, 1950. Print.

<span style="display: block; height: 1px; left: -40px; overflow: hidden; position: absolute; top: -25px; width: 1px;">"Declaration of Independence." //National Archives and Records Administration//. National Archives. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html>.